I only say that because it seems few groups continue to build their product into something of quality after being rejected by YC and its sad. A prevailing view

I only say that because it seems few groups continue to build their product into something of quality after being rejected by YC and its sad. A prevailing view is if they cant be funded by YC, then there is no point in continuing. Its almost as if YC could foresee this would happen with certain groups and it turns out true. Why does it seem all groups who are funded by YC continue to build something and all who are not, dont? I am exaggerating about the sharpness of that division but not by much. It might often be because the idea is so early stage that it is easy for the founders to get derailed before following through with its execution. It might also be viewing YC as a requirement to be successful rather than one option. You alone decide if you are willing to work until you bleed in order to build something great. So dont waste too much time thinking about things which could get in the way. I would really to see more founders pick themselves up after rejection and go on to release something stellar.